The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1887-04-19
THE TRIBUNE VS.. PRESIDENT
CLEVELAND.

To the Editor of THE SALT LAKE HERALD.
/ believe it is pretty well known to
yourself, Mr.. Editor, and also to many
of your readers, that 1 am one of the
oldest Democrats here abouts.. It is
equally well understood that have not
been always in harmony with some OF
the acts of Our Democratic President;
especially that 1 do not coincide with
his views regarding silver. and the re-
tention of Republicans in office.
have been of the opinion, and still bold
to it. that the new Hickory broom
ought, long since, to have swept the
"Augean stabIe;" that Republican
office-holders, whether offensive par
tt ans sor not, should have been in
continently bounced from Offices, and
their places filed by Democrats.
Such course would have been in
accordance with the ''le1 non
scripts" of both political parties.
But this difference of opinion between
the President. and myself on these
points does not prevent me from &C
cOrding praise where it is due, nor s. ay
my pen IL defending him when IN
justly assaiied, whether the assailant
be d Democrat or a Republican, and
now solicit space in your columns o
reply TO very violent ana
calumnious attack which appeared q
the editor al columns of he Sundays
issue CT the Salt Lake Daily Tribune
The Tribune boasts, and with Justice
[ admit, brilliant and able editor in
chief, and [ am surprised, or will be.
should learn that he either wrote or
sanctioned the article to which allusion
is here made.
It is evident from the nature and
violence of the Tri6une's personal abuse
of President Cleveland that that paper
and its pet, ex-District Attorney Dick
son, have been hit, and hit hard. While
admitting, as il does the right of an adj
ministration to surround itself with its
friends, that paper ouarrels with the
manner Of MIR. Dickson's removal from
Office.
fit be true, as is asserted. that when
Mr.. Dickson resigned and removed
from the Territory, q direct appeal
was made to him by the Attorney
General to withdraw his resignation"
1 cannot but believe that able official
made q mistake. But did Mr.. Garland
make the appeal? The Unsupported
assertion Of the ordinary partisan news.
paper on this point requires confirma-
ton. This partisan organ of the Re
publican party says that 1.-THE manner
of the removal of Mr.. Dickson is q dis.
grace to President Cleveland and two
or three Of his advisers" Itoccurs to
me, that if anybody is disgraced it is
the man who is asked to resign an
Office. Instead. Of charging the admin
istration with disgracing itself, Mr..
Dickson ought to return thanks for be-
ing retained in Office so long.
The Tribune goesfar beyond the bounds
of truth, reason and decency in its
diatribe when itsays 1.-The removal is in
tended solely as punishment for man
who has performed his duty and simply
because he has reformed it,"
This sort of talk by the organ of Mr..
Dickson ought to convince Mr.. CIeve-
land and his two or three advisers"
that the indulgence extended to Mr..
that instead of retaining him in his
Office so long, he ought to have been
asked to walk the plank months ago.
In its indictment of Cleveland the
Tribune says: when Cleveland par
doned the convict Evans it was clear
that in his confusion he had forgotten
both his honor and his duty as chief
of the United States.a
Honor and duty. quotha! Upon what
peculiar meat doth this great Cesar
who scribbles for the Tribune feed, that
be assumes the role of Judge as to the
honor and duty of the President of the
United States?
Again: at has long been evident
that the administration did not desire
any further serious prosecutions under
the Edmunds law" To whom has this
been evident? Had the writer used
the word prosecutions instead of pros
ecutions it would have been more cor
rect.
l infer from the tone of the organ of
Mr.. Dickson, that that paper and its
,onfreres are suffering more from
Dickson's removal than he does per-
:onally. 1t says:
They the organ and confreres] have |
been betrayed by the President of the |
United States, and the betrayal is Just |
IS shameful as though it had been
through the malice instead of the |
of the Chief Magistrate.
1o peLIay 10 10 give up Of disclose |
Betrayal is an act of |
,etraying, a breach of. trust. A BE-
'rayer is one who betrays; traitor.
Now, if the President has BETRAYED |
he must be traitor; he has |
'reacherously betrayed some person or
persons; he has committed breach of +
rust. If so, the questions arise, Whom
las he betrayed2 To whom is he |
raitor? What has he given up or
disclosed?
[ pass by the charge of stupidity |
when applied to such a man as Cleve-
and by the writer in the Tribune; it is /
90 ridiculous.